Chapter X: Part 10

“_My Dear Brethren_,--You were never in your lives in so critical
a situation as you are at this time. It is your part to be
peacemakers; to be loving and tender to all; but to addict
yourselves to no party. In spite of all solicitations, of rough or
smooth words, say not one word against one or the other side. Keep
yourselves pure: do all you can to help and soften all; but beware
how you adopt another’s jar. See that you act in full union with
each other; this is of the utmost consequence. Not only let there
be no bitterness or anger, but no shyness or coldness, between you.
Mark all those who would set one of you against the other. Some
such will never be wanting. But give them no countenance; rather
ferret them out, and drag them into open day. The conduct of T.
Rankin has been suitable to the Methodist plan. I hope all of you
tread in his steps. Let your eye be single. Be in peace with each
other, and the God of peace will be with you.”

Under the same date, Charles Wesley wrote to Rankin as follows.

“MY DEAR BROTHER,--As to public affairs, I wish you to be like-minded
with me. I am of neither side, and yet of both; on the side of New
England, and of Old. Private Christians are excused, exempted,
privileged, to take no part in civil troubles. We love all, and pray
for all, with a sincere and impartial love. Faults there may be on
both sides; but such as neither you nor I can remedy: therefore, let
us, and all our children, give ourselves unto prayer, and so stand
still and see the salvation of God.”

The war was not the only thing that gave Wesley trouble. Thomas Rankin and Francis Asbury were not able to agree; and Miss Gilbert had actually written to Asbury, stating that Mr. Gilbert was about to leave Antigua; and wishing him to come, and to take charge of the three hundred Methodists in that island. Asbury was inclined to accept of this invitation; but was deterred by his want of ordination, and therefore, as he thought, want of authority to administer the sacraments of the Christian church. Wesley wished him to return to England. What a disaster, if he had![227] These facts will cast light on the following letters.

“PORTARLINGTON, _April 21, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--Brother Asbury has sent me a few lines, and I thank him
for them. But I do not advise him to go to Antigua. Let him come home
without delay. If one or two stout, healthy young men would willingly
offer themselves to that service, I should have no objection; but
none should go, unless he was fully persuaded in his own mind. I
am afraid, you will soon find a day of trial: the clouds are black
both over England and America. It is well if this summer passes
over without some showers of blood. And if the storm once begins in
America, it will soon spread to Great Britain.

“I am, dear Tommy, etc.,

“JOHN WESLEY.”

“BALLINROBE, _May 19, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--I doubt not but brother Asbury and you will part
friends; I hope I shall see him at the conference. He is quite an
upright man. I apprehend he will go through his work more cheerfully
when he is a little distance from me.

“We must speak the plain truth, wherever we are, whether men will
hear, or whether they will forbear. And among our societies we must
enforce our rules, with all mildness and steadiness.

“Never was there a time, when it was more necessary for all that
fear God, both in England and in America, to wrestle with God in
mighty prayer. In all the other judgments of God, the inhabitants of
the earth learn righteousness; but wherever war breaks out, God is
forgotten, if He be not set at open defiance. What a glorious work
of God was at Cambuslang and Kilsyth, from 1740 to 1744! But the war
that followed tore it all up by the roots, and left scarce any trace
of it behind; insomuch that, when I diligently inquired a few years
after, I could not find one that retained the life of God!”

“CLARMAIN, _June 13, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--I am afraid our correspondence, for the time to come,
will be more uncertain than ever, since the sword is drawn; and it
is well if they have not, on both sides, thrown away the scabbard.
What will the end of these things be, either in Europe or America?
It seems, huge confusion and distress, such as neither we nor our
fathers had known![228] But it is enough, if all issues in glory
to God, and peace and goodwill among men. Never had America such a
call to repentance; for, unless general reformation prevent general
destruction, what a scene will soon be opened! Ruin and desolation
must soon overspread the land; and fair houses be turned into ruinous
heaps. But what are those strange phenomena which you speak of? Send
me an account of just so much as you can depend on. Should you not
appoint in America, as we do in England and Ireland, one or more
general days of fasting and prayer?”

“NEAR LEEDS, _July 28, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--I rejoice to hear that the work of our Lord still
prospers in your hands. If the temple is built even in troublous
times, it is not by the power of man. I rejoice too over honest
Francis Asbury, and hope he will no more enter into temptation. I
know no reason why you should not print the names of the American
preachers. You may print an edition of the ‘Christian Pattern,’ and
apply the profits of it to the payment of the debt. The societies
should pay the passage of the preachers. But you must not imagine,
that any more of them will come to America till these troubles are at
an end.

“Certainly, this is the point which we should insist upon, in season
and out of season. The universal corruption of all orders and degrees
of men loudly calls for the vengeance of God; and, inasmuch as all
other nations are equally corrupt, it seems God will punish us by
one another. What can prevent this, but a universal, or, at least, a
general repentance?”

“LONDON, _August 13, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--I am not sorry that brother Asbury stays with you
another year. In that time, it will be seen what God will do with
North America; and you will easily judge whether our preachers are
called to remain any longer therein. If they are, God will make their
way plain, and give them favour even with the men that delight in
war. The clouds do indeed gather more and more; and it seems a heavy
storm will follow; certainly it will, unless the prayers of the
faithful obtain a longer reprieve.”

“LONDON, _October 20, 1775_.

“DEAR TOMMY,--I am glad you are going into North Carolina; and why
not into South Carolina too? I apprehend, those provinces would bear
much fruit, as most parts of them are fresh, unbroken ground. And as
the people are further removed from the din of war, they may be more
susceptible of the gospel of peace.

“A paper was sent to me lately, occasioned by the troubles in
America; but it would not do good. It is abundantly too tart; and
nothing of that kind will be of service now. All parties are already
too much sharpened against each other; we must pour water, not oil,
into the flame. I had written a little tract[229] upon the subject
before I knew the American ports were shut up. I think there is not
one sharp word therein; I did not design there should. However, many
are excessively angry; and would willingly burn me and it together.
Indeed it is provoking; I suppose above forty thousand of them have
been printed in three weeks, and still the demand for them is as
great as ever.

“I am entirely of your mind. I am persuaded, love and tender measures
will do far more than violence. And if I should have an interview
with a great man, which seems to be not unlikely, I will tell him so,
without any circumlocution.

“I am, dear Tommy, your affectionate friend and brother,

“JOHN WESLEY.”[230]

The “great man” referred to was probably Lord North, the prime minister of the English cabinet, to whom, and to the Earl of Dartmouth, Wesley had, four months before, addressed most important letters, in which he strongly endeavoured to convince the government of the exceedingly critical condition of public matters. No man in the kingdom had suffered more from the violation of English law than Wesley had; and yet now, in England’s extremity, no man evinced a more loyal spirit than was evinced by him. Indeed, his loyalty became, in the eyes of his enemies, a crime, and brought him, not reward, but ruffianly reproach. An extract from the letters to the two ministers of state may fitly, for the present, close these American reminiscences.

“ARMAGH, _June 15, 1775_.

“MY LORD,--Whether my writing do any good or no, it need do no harm;
for it rests with your lordship whether any eye but your own shall
see it.

“I do not enter upon the question, whether the Americans are in
the right or in the wrong. Here all my prejudices are against
the Americans; for I am a high churchman,[231] the son of a high
churchman, bred up, from my childhood, in the highest notions of
passive obedience and non-resistance; and yet, in spite of all my
long rooted prejudices, I cannot avoid thinking, if I think at all,
that an oppressed people asked for nothing more than their legal
rights, and that in the most modest and inoffensive manner that the
nature of the thing would allow.[232] But waiving all considerations
of right and wrong, I ask, is it common sense to use force towards
the Americans? These men will not be frightened; and it seems, they
will not be conquered so easily as was at first imagined. They will
probably dispute every inch of ground; and, if they die, die sword
in hand. Indeed, some of our valiant officers say, ‘Two thousand
men will clear America of these rebels.’ No, nor twenty thousand,
be they rebels or not, nor perhaps treble that number. They are as
strong men as you; they are as valiant as you, if not abundantly
more valiant, for they are one and all enthusiasts,--enthusiasts for
liberty. They are calm, deliberate enthusiasts; and we know how this
principle ‘breathes into softer souls stern love of war, and thirst
of vengeance, and contempt of death.’ We know men, animated with this
spirit, will leap into a fire, or rush into a cannon’s mouth.

“‘But they have no experience in war.’ And how much more have our
troops? Very few of them ever saw a battle. ‘But they have no
discipline.’ That is an entire mistake. Already they have near as
much as our army, and they will learn more of it every day; so that,
in a short time, if the fatal occasion continue, they will understand
it as well as their assailants.[233] ‘But they are divided amongst
themselves.’ No, my lord, they are terribly united; not in the
province of New England only, but down as low as the Jerseys and
Pennsylvania. The bulk of the people are so united, that to speak a
word in favour of the present English measures would almost endanger
a man’s life. Those who informed me of this are no sycophants; they
say nothing to curry favour; they have nothing to gain or lose by me.
But they speak with sorrow of heart what they have seen with their
own eyes, and heard with their own ears.

“These men think, one and all, be it right or wrong, that they are
contending _pro aris et focis_; for their wives, children, and
liberty. What an advantage have they herein over many that fight
only for pay! none of whom care a straw for the cause wherein they
are engaged; most of whom strongly disapprove of it. Have they not
another considerable advantage? Is there occasion to recruit troops?
Their supplies are at hand, and all round about them. Ours are three
thousand miles off. Are we then able to conquer the Americans,
suppose they are left to themselves, suppose all our neighbours
should stand stock still, and leave us and them to fight it out? But
we are not sure of this. Nor are we sure that all our neighbours will
stand stock still. I doubt they have not promised it; and, if they
had, could we rely upon those promises? ‘Yet, it is not probable
they will send ships or men to America.’ Is there not a shorter way?
Do they not know where England and Ireland lie? And have they not
troops, as well as ships, in readiness? All Europe is well apprised
of this; only the English know nothing of the matter! What if they
find means to land but two thousand men? Where are the troops in
England or Ireland to oppose them? Why, cutting the throats of their
brethren in America! Poor England, in the meantime!

“‘But we have our militia--our valiant, disciplined militia. These
will effectually oppose them.’ Give me leave, my lord, to relate a
little circumstance, of which I was informed by a clergyman who knew
the fact. In 1716, a large body of militia were marching towards
Preston against the rebels. In a wood, which they were passing by, a
boy happened to discharge his fowling piece. The soldiers gave up all
for lost, and, by common consent, threw down their arms, and ran for
life. So much dependence is to be placed on our valorous militia.

“But, my lord, this is not all. We have thousands of enemies, perhaps
more dangerous than French or Spaniards. As I travel four or five
thousand miles every year, I have an opportunity of conversing
freely with more persons of every denomination than any one else in
the three kingdoms. I cannot but know the general disposition of
the people,--English, Scots, and Irish; and I know a large majority
of them are exasperated almost to madness. Exactly so they were
throughout England and Scotland about the year 1640, and, in a great
measure, by the same means; by inflammatory papers, which were
spread, as they are now, with the utmost diligence, in every corner
of the land. Hereby the bulk of the population were effectually cured
of all love and reverence for the king. So that, first despising,
then hating him, they were just ripe for open rebellion. And, I
assure your lordship, so they are now. They want nothing but a leader.

“Two circumstances more are deserving to be considered: the one, that
there was, at that time, a decay of general trade almost throughout
the kingdom; the other, there was a common dearness of provisions.
The case is the same, in both respects, at this day. So that, even
now, there are multitudes of people that, having nothing to do, and
nothing to eat, are ready for the first bidder; and that, without
inquiring into the merits of the case, would flock to any that would
give them bread.

“Upon the whole, I am really sometimes afraid that this evil is
from the Lord. When I consider the astonishing luxury of the rich,
and the shocking impiety of rich and poor, I doubt whether general
dissoluteness of manners does not demand a general visitation.
Perhaps the decree is already gone forth from the Governor of the
world. Perhaps even now:

‘As he that buys, surveys a ground,
So the destroying angel measures it around.
Calm he surveys the perishing nation;
Ruin behind him stalks, and empty desolation.’

“But we Englishmen are too wise to acknowledge that God has anything
to do in the world! Otherwise should we not seek Him by fasting and
prayer, before He lets the lifted thunder drop? O my lord, if your
lordship can do anything, let it not be wanting! For God’s sake, for
the sake of the king, of the nation, of your lovely family, remember
Rehoboam! Remember Philip the Second! Remember King Charles the First!

“I am, with true regard, my lord, your lordship’s obedient servant,

“JOHN WESLEY.”[234]

Whatever may be thought of the principle advocated in Wesley’s “Calm Address to the American Colonies,” namely, that taxation without representation is no tyranny, there can be no doubt that his letters to the premier and to the colonial secretary are full of warnings and foresight which were terribly fulfilled; and, for fidelity, fulness, terseness, in short, for _multum in parvo_, were perhaps without a parallel in the correspondence of these ministers of state.

Much space has been occupied with these American affairs. If an apology were needed, the reader might be courteously reminded (1) that John Wesley’s “Calm Address” threw, not Methodism only, but the nation, into a fever of excitement, and, directly and indirectly, gave birth to scores of pamphlets on the same subject; (2) that the American rebellion is one of the greatest events in English history; and (3) that, in consequence of the great majority of the clergy of the English Church fleeing from the colonies, when the colonies most needed them, Methodism, under the sagacious management of the apostolic Asbury, took the place which had hitherto been occupied by Anglican episcopacy; and, henceforth, literally became the predominant religion of what is likely to be the greatest and most prosperous country in the world.

We must now return to Wesley in a more private capacity.

The reader has long lost sight of Peter Bohler. In 1739, after the conversion of the two Wesleys, Bohler went to Georgia, and his life, since then, had been spent in unwearied Christian work, partly in America and partly in Europe. His labours now were nearly ended; and, on April 27, 1775, he peacefully expired, in London, at the age of sixty-three. For years past, correspondence seems to have ceased between Wesley and his early Moravian friend. Within three months of Bohler’s death, it was renewed. Wesley wrote to him on the 5th of February, and Bohler, in a beautifully Christian letter, responded. A few days later, Wesley wrote again, as follows.

“_February 18, 1775._

“MY DEAR BROTHER,--When I say, ‘I hope I shall never be constrained
to speak otherwise of them’ (the Moravians), I do not mean, that I
have any expectation this will ever happen. Probably it never will.
I never did speak but when I believed it was my duty so to do. And,
if they would calmly consider what I have spoken from March 10,
1736, and were open to conviction, they might be such Christians as
are hardly in the world besides. I have not lost sight of you yet.
Indeed, I cannot, if you are ‘a city set upon a hill.’

“Perhaps no one living is a greater lover of peace, or has laboured
more for it, than I; particularly, among the children of God.[235]
I set out, near fifty years ago, with this principle, ‘Whosoever
doeth the will of my Father who is in heaven, the same is my brother,
and sister, and mother.’ But there is no one living that has been
more abused for his pains, even to this day. But it is all well. By
the grace of God, I shall go on, following peace with all men, and
loving your Brethren beyond any body of men upon earth, except the
Methodists.

“Wishing you every gospel blessing, I remain your very affectionate
brother,
“JOHN WESLEY.”[236]

Thus ended Wesley’s intercourse with Bohler, till it was renewed in heaven.

Eleven days after the above was written, Wesley left London for Ireland, proceeding, as usual, by way of Bristol and the midland counties. Nothing remarkable occurred in his journey to Liverpool. Of course, he was preaching continually, and, winter though it was, sometimes out of doors. While doing so, at Newcastle under Lyne, “a buffoon,” he says, “laboured to interrupt him; but, as he was bawling, with his mouth wide open, some arch boys gave him such a mouthful of dirt as quite satisfied him.”

At Dublin, at the request of “the good old dean,” he assisted in administering the Lord’s supper in St. Patrick’s. At Maryborough, he complied with the wish of the clergyman, and preached in the parish church. The Methodist chapel at Waterford he describes as “a foul, horrid, miserable hole.” For the first time, he preached at Clones, using, as his church, an old Danish fort. Here Methodism had been introduced about the year 1768. The papists were furious, and magistrates refused to interfere; but, just when the place was about to be given up, a military pensioner, an old presbyterian, took his stand in the centre of the market, and, shouldering his musket, declared that he would shoot the first man that attempted to disturb the preacher. The rioters were frightened; and the rough old soldier mounted guard every sabbath afternoon, until opposition ceased.[237]

At Londonderry, Wesley accepted the bishop’s invitation to dinner; the prelate remarking, “I know you do not love our hours, and will therefore order dinner to be on the table between two and three o’clock.” “We had,” says Wesley, “a piece of boiled beef, and an English pudding. This is true good breeding.”

At Castle Caulfield, writes Wesley, with the utmost _sang froid_, “the rain came plentifully, through the thatch, into my lodging room; but I found no present inconvenience, and was not careful for the morrow.”

Six days afterwards, Wesley was seized with illness, which nearly proved fatal; but for three days more, though in a burning fever, he continued travelling and preaching almost as usual. He had now reached the town of Lurgan, where, four years previously, a society had been formed, one of the first members being Isaac Bullock, an old soldier, who had been at the capture of several islands in the West Indies, and was one of sixty, called “the forlorn hope,” who, in 1762, first entered the breach at the storming of Havannah, only six of the sixty escaping with their lives. The house of this sturdy veteran was the preaching place of the Lurgan Methodists.[238] Here Wesley was obliged to succumb to fever. He sent for a physician, who told him he must rest. Wesley replied, he could not, as he “had appointed to preach at several places, and must preach as long as he could speak.” The doctor gave him medicine, and off he went to Tanderagee, and then to a gentleman’s seat, three miles beyond Lisburn, where nature sank, and the conquered evangelist was compelled to take his bed. Strength, memory, and mind entirely failed. For three days, he lay more dead than alive. His tongue was black and swollen. He was violently convulsed. For some time his pulse was not discernible. Hope was almost gone; when Joseph Bradford, his travelling companion, came with a cup, and said, “Sir, you must take this.” Wesley writes: “I thought, ‘I will, if I can swallow, to please him; for it will do me neither harm nor good.’ Immediately it set me a vomiting; my heart began to beat, and my pulse to play again; and, from that hour, the extremity of the symptoms abated.” Six days afterwards, to the astonishment of his friends, and, as he says, “trusting in God,” he set out for Dublin, where, within a week, he was preaching as usual.

This was a memorable epoch, even in Wesley’s eventful life. The house in which he lay so dangerously ill was the hospitable dwelling of Mr. Gayer, of Derryaghey,[239] a devoted Methodist of great respectability, who had built a chapel in the village, and, for the accommodation of the preachers, a room, which went by the name of “the prophet’s chamber.” His daughter, afterwards Mrs. Wolfenden, was now a converted girl, sixteen years of age, and, with her mother, was Wesley’s nurse. Great anxiety was felt for Wesley’s life, and, while a few select friends were praying that, as in the case of Hezekiah, God would add to his days fifteen years, Mrs. Gayer suddenly rose from her knees, and cried, “The prayer is granted!” Marvellously enough, Wesley’s recovery immediately commenced, and he survived, from June 1775 to March 1791, a period of just fifteen years, and a few months over.

But even this was not all the wonder. Alexander Mather, at the time, was at Sheerness, in Kent, where he read, in the newspapers, that Wesley was actually dead. Mather says, he was not able to give credence to this; and, before he went to preach, he opened his Bible on the words, “Behold, I will add unto thy days fifteen years” (Isa. xxxviii. 5); and away he went to the chapel, and began to pray that the promise, made to Hezekiah, might be fulfilled in the case of Wesley.[240] These are striking facts. We give them as we find them. The sceptic will sneer; but the Christian will exercise an unfaltering faith in the glorious text, which, in the history of the church, has been confirmed in instances without number: “The effectual fervent prayer of a righteous man availeth much.”

The news of Wesley’s dangerous illness created the utmost consternation among his friends. The following is a letter, hitherto unpublished, addressed by Charles Wesley to Joseph Bradford, Wesley’s faithful companion.

“BRISTOL, _June 29, 1775_.

“DEAR JOSEPH,--Be of good cheer. The Lord liveth, and all live to
Him. Your last is just arrived, and has cut off all hope of my
brother’s recovery. If he could hold out till now, that is, ten
days longer, he might recover; but I dare not allow myself to hope
it, till I hear from you again. The people here, and in London, and
every place, are swallowed up in sorrow. But sorrow and death will
soon be swallowed up in life everlasting. You will be careful of my
brother’s papers, etc., till you see his executors. God shall reward
your fidelity and love. I seem scarce separated from him whom I shall
so very soon overtake. We were united in our lives, and in our death
not divided. Brethren, pray a very little longer for your loving
servant--CHARLES WESLEY.

“_Thursday Evening._

“Yours of the 20th, I have this moment received. It only confirms
my fears. My brother, soon after you wrote, in all probability,
entered into the joy of his Lord. Yet write again, and send me the
particulars. I have not, and never more shall have, strength for such
a journey. The Lord prepare us for a speedy removal to our heavenly
country!

“CHARLES WESLEY.”

The tidings of Wesley’s recovery produced corresponding joy. His old friend and former itinerant, now the Rev. Dr. John Jones, of Harwich, wrote to him as follows.

“HARWICH, _July 29, 1775_.

“REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I cannot express what I felt when I was
informed that you were both senseless and speechless. It was like
life from the dead when I heard you were out of danger and able to
sit up. It gave me some hope, that God has not yet given up these
sinful nations, and that He will strive with us a little longer. Time
was when you would have taken my advice, at least, in some things.
Let me entreat, let me beseech you, to preach less frequently,
and that only at the principal places. You must be satisfied with
directing others, and doing less yourself. You yourself do not know
of how great importance your life is. Far be it from me to desire you
not to travel; I only beg you not to go beyond your strength.

“JOHN JONES.”[241]

Another friend, in London, wrote the following.

“LONDON, _July 8, 1775_.

“REVEREND SIR,--God, who comforteth those who are cast down, hath
comforted us by graciously restoring you to us again. The prayer of
faith has saved the sick. The voice of joy and gladness is now found
in the dwellings of the righteous; where eight days past there were
mourning, lamentation, and woe. Every social repast was embittered,
and we literally mingled our drink with our tears. Could you, from
the bed of sickness, have cast your eyes on the congregation, the
first sabbath in the month, and beheld distress in every face, keen
anguish in every heart, your generous soul would have been willing
to have tarried awhile, absent from your Lord, to return to comfort
those mourners in Sion. The tidings of your recovery was received
with melting gratitude and joyous tears. O sir, what a week of
suspense and anguish! You will not surely blame us, that our prayers
helped to detain you in the vale below. Forgive your weeping friends
if they have brought you back from the skies: surely, in the end, you
will be amply recompensed! O yes! being longer employed in the work
of faith, and labour of love, your crown will be the brighter.”[242]

These are specimens of the loving congratulations of Wesley’s friends.[243] His illness was sharp, though short. The only lasting effect was, it stripped him, at all events for months afterwards, of his beautiful head of hair.[244]

Having spent three weeks in Dublin, and regained his strength, he, on July 23, embarked for England, having in the morning of that day again assisted in administering the Lord’s supper in St. Patrick’s cathedral. Landing at Parkgate, he proceeded to Leeds to meet his conference, preaching, as he travelled, with as much zest as ever; except that he spent a day or two at Miss Bosanquet’s, making conference preparations. Notwithstanding the warnings and entreaties of his friends, his labours were unabated. Referring to his illness and recovery, he wrote, in 1781: “From this time” (1775) “I have, by the grace of God, gone on in the same track, travelling between four and five thousand miles a year, and, once in two years, going through Great Britain and Ireland; which, by the blessing of God, I am as well able to do now as I was twenty or thirty years ago. About a hundred and thirty of my fellow labourers are continually employed in the same thing. We all aim at one point, not at profit, any more than at ease, or pleasure, or the praise of men; but to spread true religion through London, Dublin, Edinburgh, and, as we are able, through the three kingdoms. This is our point. We leave every man to enjoy his own opinion, and to use his own mode of worship, desiring only, that the love of God and his neighbour be the ruling principle in his heart, and show itself in his life by a uniform practice of justice, mercy, and truth. And, accordingly, we give the right hand of fellowship to every lover of God and man, whatever his opinion or mode of worship be, of which he is to give an account to God only.”[245]

Dr. Jones’s advice to Wesley was lost labour. Wesley’s life was a perpetual motion. Work seemed to be essential to its continuance. There are but few who can sincerely sing the lines, which he, from his inmost heart, sang so often:

“Oh that, without a lingering groan,
I may the welcome word receive,
My body with my charge lay down,
And cease _at once to work and live_!”

Wesley, however, could give advice, though it was not always that he took it. The following extract from a letter to his brother, written at this period, contains an example of this, besides referring to his publishing affairs and the movements of his miserable wife.

“LONDONDERRY, _June 2, 1775_.

“DEAR BROTHER,--I thought it strange, that poor Samuel Franks should
leave me £900 in debt. But it is stranger still, that John Atlay
should have paid £1600 out of nine; and that I am £160 in debt
notwithstanding!

“Mr. Walthen’s method of radical cure I shall hardly try.[246] I am
very easy, and that is enough.

“Has my friend taken a house at Bristol? Is Noah with her? What are
they doing?

“Preach as much as you can, and no more than you can. You never will
be much stronger till you add change of air to exercise; riding
two or three hundred miles point blank forward. Now you have an
opportunity. Meet me at Leeds with honest John Murlin. When you are
tired you may change places with him. You would return a stout,
healthy man.

“Peace be with you and yours! Adieu!

“JOHN WESLEY.”[247]

Another instance of advice giving is too racy to be omitted. The letter was addressed to John King, one of his preachers in America.

“NEAR LEEDS, _July 28, 1775_.

“MY DEAR BROTHER,--Always take advice or reproof as a favour: it is
the surest mark of love.

“I advised you once, and you took it as an affront; nevertheless I
will do it once more.

“Scream no more, at the peril of your soul. God now warns you by me,
whom He has set over you. Speak as earnestly as you can; but do not
scream. Speak with all your heart; but with a moderate voice. It was
said of our Lord, ‘He shall not _cry_’: the word properly means, He
shall not _scream_. Herein, be a follower of me, as I am of Christ.
I often speak loud, often vehemently; but I never scream; I never
strain myself. I dare not: I know it would be a sin against God and
my own soul. Perhaps one reason why that good man, Thomas Walsh, yea,
and John Manners too, were in such grievous darkness before they
died, was, because they shortened their own lives.

“O John, pray for an advisable and teachable temper! By nature you
are very far from it: you are stubborn and headstrong. Your last
letter was written in a very wrong spirit. If you cannot take advice
from others, surely you might take it from your affectionate brother,

“JOHN WESLEY.”[248]

The above characteristic letter was written at Miss Bosanquet’s, Cross Hall, Morley, where Wesley had arranged to have if possible, a few days’ retirement, before he met his conference, at Leeds. In a letter to that lady, dated May 29, 1775, and therefore previous to his illness, he writes: “The last day of June, I hope to be in Dublin, and the end of July in England. If I have a ready passage, probably I may have an opportunity of hiding myself a day or two with you; but I do not desire any of the preachers to come to me till I send for them. If they do, I shall run away; I will not be in a crowd.”[249]

One or two days’ retirement was not much for an old man to wish; but it was more than he could get. The preachers would not be prevented seeing him; and who can blame them? If the magnet attracts the needle, the magnet has no right to censure the needle for yielding to its own attractive influence. An extract from an unpublished letter, written, at this period, by simple hearted, loving Samuel Bardsley, will illustrate what we mean. “I never was at a better conference. The Lord was with us of a truth. Had you seen us, and our dear, aged father and friend in the midst of us, and beheld the freedom and harmony there were among us, you would have blessed God on our behalf. We seemed to be determined to live and preach the gospel more than ever. On the Thursday before the conference began, Mr. Oliver and I had the pleasure of drinking tea and supping with dear Mr. Wesley, at Miss Bosanquet’s, where we stopped all night. We were there when he arrived from Ireland, and I need not tell you with what joy and thankfulness we received the man of God, and especially as he appeared with his usual cheerfulness, and as well as we had seen him for some years. I had the pleasure of being with him alone, and desired him not to send me far from home. If he had proposed Worcester to me, I would have gone; but, as he did not, I thought it best to leave it to him where to send me; so he fixed me in this circuit (Haworth), which I shall love, if I have health, and live near to God.”

The conference at Leeds opened on August 1, and concluded, its sittings two days afterwards. It was the largest that had assembled for many years, and was unexampled for its free discussion.[250] Wesley writes: “Having received several letters, intimating that many of the preachers were utterly unqualified for the work, having neither grace nor gifts sufficient for it, I determined to examine the weighty charge with all possible exactness. In order to this, I read those letters to all the conference; and begged, that every one would freely propose and enforce whatever objection he had to any one. The objections proposed were considered at large; in two or three difficult cases, committees were appointed for that purpose. In consequence of this, we were all fully convinced, that the charge advanced was without foundation; that God has really sent those labourers into His vineyard, and has qualified them for the work; and we were all more closely united together than we had been for many years.”

The very day after the conference concluded, Wesley again set out on his blessed wanderings, and preached at Bradford and Great Horton. He then took coach to London; spent five days there; and then went off to Wales, Bristol, and Cornwall; and got back to London on October 6. The remainder of the year was spent, partly in the metropolis, and partly in his usual tours through Bedfordshire, Northamptonshire, Oxfordshire, Buckinghamshire, Norfolk, Kent, and Surrey.

The nation was too much excited, in 1775, to take much interest in the Calvinian controversy; which, however, still proceeded. Fletcher published “The Second Part of the Scripture Scales”: 12mo, 237 pages. Also, “The Last Check 1775 to Antinomianism. A Polemical Essay on the Twin Doctrines of Christian Imperfection and a Death Purgatory.” 12mo, 327 pages. Toplady, likewise, issued “The Scheme of Christian and Philosophical Necessity Asserted; in opposition to Mr. John Wesley’s Tract on that Subject.”

As usual, Toplady excelled in abusiveness. He tells his readers, that the chief ingredients in Wesley’s tract are “an equal portion of gross heathenism, Pelagianism, Mahometism, popery, Manicheanism, ranterism, and antinomianism, culled, dried, and pulverized, _secundum artem_; and, above all, mingled with as much palpable atheism as could be possibly scraped together.” Wesley is taunted as a “poor gentleman, who is necessarily an universal meddler; and, as necessarily, an universal miscarrier.” “He paddles in metaphysics, knows a little, presumes a great deal, and so jumps to conclusions.” His “Thoughts on Necessity” are “as crude and dark as chaos.”

This scurrility was a thing to which Wesley had been long accustomed. It was cast upon him by writers of all descriptions. In this same year, 1775, an octavo pamphlet of 35 pages was published, with the title, “A Letter to a Friend on the Subject of Methodism;” in which the anonymous writer, among a multitude of other calumnies, declares that the tendency of Wesley’s system is “to fill parishes with whores, rogues, and bastards”; and defines Methodist preaching as “a ridiculous effusion, delivered with an enthusiastic air, a distorted countenance, a whining, snivelling accent, and a soporific, nasal twang.” Wesley had too much of a gentleman’s self respect to even notice vulgarities like these; and yet they were far from being pleasant, and tend to show that Methodism struggled into its mighty manhood amid the incessant peltings of every kind of pitiless persecution. The storm, during Wesley’s lifetime, from one quarter or another, was perpetual; but, powerless to destroy, it simply made the roots of the tree strike deeper.

Two of Wesley’s publications, in 1775, have been already noticed. The others were:

1. “A Sermon on 1 John v. 7.” Dublin: 12mo, 31 pages.

2. “The Important Question. A Sermon, preached in Taunton, on September 12, 1775. Published at the Request of many of the Hearers, for the Benefit of a Public Charity.” 12mo, 33 pages. This sermon was delivered in the presbyterian chapel, and was made the means of converting Mrs. Stone, in whose house Dr. Coke, shortly after, met Wesley’s preachers, to confer with them about his religious scruples; and where he preached his first sermon outside the precincts of a parish church.[251]

3. “A Concise History of England, from the earliest times to the death of George II.” 12mo, 4 vols. Price, to subscribers, half a guinea. Wesley says, his “volumes contain the substance of the English history, extracted chiefly from Dr. Goldsmith, Rapin, and Smollett; only with various corrections and additions.” Wesley made a profit of £200 by this publication; but gave it all away the week he got it.[252]

For many years, William Pine of Bristol had been Wesley’s chief printer and publisher, and had recently brought out a revised edition of Wesley’s collected works, in thirty-two 12mo volumes. Henceforth, the connection ceased. Pine became a red hot partisan of the rebellious colonists. Wesley disliked this, and wrote as follows to his brother Charles.

“LEEDS, _July 31, 1775_.

“DEAR BROTHER,--I must not delay answering your important question,
‘What can be done with William Pine?’ If he still, after my earnest
warning, ‘every week publishes barefaced treason,’ I beg you would
once more warn him, in my name and in your own; and if he slights or
forgets this warning, then give him his choice, either to leave us
quietly, or to be publicly disowned. At such a time as this, when our
foreign enemies are hovering over us, and our own nation is all in a
ferment, it is particularly improper to say one word which tends to
inflame the minds of the people.”[253]

Thus Wesley’s loyalty to King George severed his connection with William Pine, the weekly publisher of the once popular _Felix Farley’s Journal_. Mr. Pine died in 1803.[254]

FOOTNOTES:

[221] Boswell’s Life of Johnson.

[222] Ibid.

[223] _Gentleman’s Magazine_, 1797, p. 455.

[224] Olivers’ “Defence,” p. 19.

[225] Vol. for 1775, p. 561.

[226] Everett’s Life of Dr. A. Clarke.

[227] Asbury’s Journal.

[228] Words fearfully realised, first in America, next in
France, and then throughout all Europe.

[229] His “Calm Address.”

[230] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., pp. 302-308.

[231] Did Wesley mean this? That is, did he use it in any
sense except that which immediately follows?

[232] This may seem to clash with the tenor of Wesley’s
“Calm Address”; but the reader must recollect, that
it was not until after the date of this letter that
the “Calm Address” was written; and that Wesley’s
change of opinions did not occur until after the
Leeds conference of 1775. Wesley’s foresight,
throughout the whole of this fearful war, was most
remarkable.

[233] It is a remarkable fact, that this letter was written
within forty-eight hours before the disgraceful and
disastrous battle at Bunker Hill, where Wesley’s
warnings to the premier and colonial secretary of
England were too amply verified. With his itinerants
in America, Wesley knew quite as much of American
affairs as Lord North, and perhaps a little more.

[234] Smith’s History of Methodism, vol. i., p. 726; and
_Macmillan’s Magazine_ for December, 1870.

[235] These were not empty words, though Wesley was almost
perpetually in war. In an unpublished letter, to
Matthew Lowes, dated March 6, 1759, he writes: “What
would one not do, except sin, that brotherly love may
continue!”

[236] _Methodist Magazine_, 1854, p. 691.

[237] Life of Henry Moore.

[238] _Methodist Magazine_, 1827, p. 800.

[239] Ibid. 1834, p. 413.

[240] York society book.

[241] _Methodist Magazine_, 1787, p. 444.

[242] Ibid. 1787, p. 552.

[243] A curious 12mo tract, of four pages, was published,
with the following title: “Some Verses, occasioned
by the severe Illness, much feared Dissolution,
and almost miraculous Restoration, of the Rev. Mr.
John Wesley, at Lisburne, in Ireland, July 2, 1775.
London: printed for W. Kent, No. 116, High Holborn:
1775.” These verses were directed to be _sung_ “to
the tune of ‘Oliver’s.’”

[244] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 469.

[245] Ibid. vol. xiii., p. 359.

[246] The cure of his hydrocele.

[247] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 132.

[248] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 309.

[249] Ibid. p. 378.

[250] Manuscript letter by Thomas Hanby.

[251] _Methodist Magazine_, 1824, p. 568.

[252] Ibid. 1845, p. 1168.

[253] Wesley’s Works, vol. xii., p. 133.

[254] J. Pawson’s manuscript letter.

1776.
Age 73

Wesley’s first act, in 1776, was to join with eighteen hundred London Methodists in renewing his covenant with God. His next was to go to Bristol, partly to bury his brother-in-law, poor Westley Hall; and partly to restrain some of the Bristol Methodists, who were in danger of turning republicans.

The health of Fletcher of Madeley being seriously affected by a violent cough, accompanied by spitting of blood, Wesley believed nothing was so likely to restore his health as a long journey. “I therefore,” says he, “proposed his taking a journey of some months with me, through various parts of England and Scotland; telling him, ‘when you are tired, or like it best, you may come into my carriage; but remember that riding on horseback is the best of all exercises for you, so far as your strength will permit.’”[255]

Wesley proposed not only this, but more than this, as is evident from Fletcher’s answer, hitherto unpublished.

“MADELEY, _January 9, 1776_.

“REVEREND AND DEAR SIR,--I received last night the favour of
yours from Bristol. My grand desire is to be just what the Lord
would have me be. I could, if you wanted a travelling
assistant, accompany you, as my little strength would admit, in
some of your excursions; but your recommending me to the
societies, as one who might succeed you, (should the Lord call
you hence before me,) is a step to which I could by no means
consent. It would make me take my horse and gallop away.
Besides, such a step would, at this juncture, be, I think,
peculiarly improper, and would cast upon my vindication of your
minutes such an odium as the Calvinists have endeavoured to
cast upon your ‘Address.’ It would make people suspect, that
what I have done for truth and conscience sake, I have done
with a view of being, what Mr. Toplady calls, ‘the bishop of
Moorfields.’ We ought to give as little hold to the evil
surmising and rash judgments of our opponents as may be. If,
nevertheless, Providence throws in your way a clergyman willing
to assist us, it would be well to fall in with that
circumstance.

“I sent to you in London, by the last post, a manuscript
entitled, ‘A Second Check to Civil Antinomianism,’ being an
extract from the ‘Homily against Rebellion,’ which I think
might be spread at this time to shame Mr. Roquet, and to calm
the people’s mind. Whether it is worth publishing you will see.
I suppose it will make a threepenny tract.

“What has made me glut our friends with my books is not my love
to such publications; but a desire to make an end of the
controversy. It is possible, however, that my design has
miscarried, and that I have disgusted, rather than convinced,
the people. I agree with you, sir, that now is the time to
pray,--both for ourselves and our king,--for the Church of
England and that part of it which is called the Methodists. I
cast my mite of supplication into the general treasure. The
Lord guide, support, and strengthen you more and more unto the
end!

“I am, reverend and dear sir, your affectionate son and servant
in the gospel,

“JOHN FLETCHER.”[256]

Fletcher had overtaxed nature. His day of activity was comparatively over. True, he lived nine years longer; but, for two years, he lived in retirement with his friends, Mr. Greenwood at Newington, and Mr. Ireland of Bristol, with the exception of the time he spent in travelling with Wesley in quest of health; and upwards of three years more were spent in Switzerland; when, returning to England, he was married, on November 12, 1781, to Miss Bosanquet, and died on August 14, 1785.

Wesley writes: “He looked upon my proposal as a call from Providence, and willingly accepted it. He set out, (as I am accustomed to do,) early in the spring of 1776, and travelled, by moderate journeys, suited to his strength, which gradually increased, eleven or twelve hundred miles. When we returned to London, in the latter end of the year, he was considerably better. And, I verily believe, if he had travelled with me, partly in the chaise and partly on horseback, only a few months longer, he would quite have recovered his health. But this those about him would not permit; so, being detained in London by his kind, but injudicious, friends, while I pursued my journeys, his spitting of blood, with all the other symptoms, returned, and rapidly increased, till the physician pronounced him to be far advanced in pulmonary consumption.”[257]

No doubt, Wesley wished to have Fletcher as his coadjutor and successor; but Providence determined otherwise. Fletcher had a great work to do, and did it; but it was not ordained that Fletcher should take Wesley’s place.

It is a remarkable coincidence, that, in the very year when the health of Fletcher failed, Wesley formed an acquaintance with Thomas Coke. Born and educated at Brecon, Coke was now twenty-nine years of age. He had taken his degrees at Oxford, had received episcopal ordination, and, at present, was curate at South Petherton. Mr. Brown, a clergyman near Taunton, lent him the sermons and journals of Wesley, and the “Checks” of Fletcher. In the month of August, 1776, Wesley was Mr. Brown’s guest at Kingston, and Coke went to see him. Wesley writes: “1776, August 13--I preached at Taunton, and afterwards went with Mr. Brown to Kingston. Here I found a clergyman, Dr. Coke, late a gentleman commoner of Jesus college, Oxford, who came twenty miles on purpose to meet me. I had much conversation with him; and a union then began, which, I trust, shall never end.” The doctor expressed his doubts respecting the propriety of confining himself to one congregation. Wesley clasped his hands, and, in a manner peculiarly his own, said: “Brother, go out, go out, and preach the gospel to all the world!”[258] Coke rode back to Petherton pensive, and yet consoled. The tone of his ministry was now more decided than ever. The parish was remodelled, so to speak, into a circuit. On Sundays, after the second lesson, he would read a paper of his appointments for the ensuing week, with the place and time of service. His innovations, in preaching in cottages and barns, took a sort of Methodistic form, by being systematically arranged. The disgust of his opponents in the parish became intense; and, to prevent his having the opportunity of preaching a farewell sermon, his rector, without any previous notice, at the close of a public service, and in the presence of a listening congregation, abruptly announced that Coke was now dismissed. The die was cast. Coke attended Wesley’s conference in Bristol, and, on August 19, 1777, Wesley writes: “I went to Taunton with Dr. Coke, who, being dismissed from his curacy, has bid adieu to his honourable name, and determined to cast in his lot with us.” Henceforth, Thomas Coke was a Methodist itinerant preacher, and became the great organiser of Methodist missions in other lands.

When Wesley enacted rules, he meant them to be observed. Laxity in the enforcement of discipline was to him a thing intolerable. He was a thorough disciplinarian himself, and insisted that his preachers should copy his example. Good as were the first Methodists, they were not perfect. Then, as now, some were defective in their attendance at the weekly class. In certain instances, as we have already seen, some were guilty of the crime of smuggling. Others, in moderation, were addicted to taking drams, and others opium; and it often happened that the oldest societies were the worst offenders. In 1776, both London and Newcastle were thus tainted; and Wesley was determined, with a strong hand, to purge them. Hence the following extracts from letters, addressed, at this period, to Joseph Benson, stationed at Newcastle.

“We must threaten no longer, but perform. In November last, I
told the London society, ‘Our rule is, to meet a class once a
week; not once in two or three. I now give you warning: I will
give tickets to none in February, but those that have done
this.’ I have stood to my word. Go you and do likewise,
wherever you visit the classes. Begin, if need be, at
Newcastle, and go on at Sunderland. Promises to meet are now
out of date. Those, that have not met seven times in the
quarter, exclude. Read their names in the society; and inform
them all, you will the next quarter exclude all that have not
met twelve times; that is, unless they were hindered by
distance, sickness, or by some unavoidable business. And I
pray, without fear or favour, remove the leaders, whether of
classes or bands, who do not watch over the souls committed to
their care ‘as those that must give account.’”

What would become of Methodist societies if these imperative directions of Methodism’s founder were enforced now?